To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

#56 | November 2008
To Tell The Truth
What happens when a defendant’s guilt or innocence hinges solely on a child’s
testimony? Defendants argue that children’s memories are too unreliable to be the basis
for a verdict. Child
rights advocates counter that
since child sex abuse is rarely
witnessed and frequently leaves
no physical evidence that victim
testimony is vital. A study from
FPG researcher Jennifer Schaaf
provides new insights into
understanding when children’s
memories are more likely to
be accurate. Her findings were
published in the Journal of
Experimental Child Psychology.
There are two major concerns
about children’s ability to report
the truth in forensic situations.
First, are they able to resist
misleading information? And
second, how hesitant are they
to reveal negative experiences?
To better predict which children
tend to be vulnerable to these
factors, Schaaf examined their
relationship to specific traits
among children. She studied 42
three-year-old and 40 five-year-old
children.
Susceptibility to being Misled
Repetitive questioning is both a common technique used to elicit information and an unintentional
byproduct of interviews by multiple people (e.g., social workers, police, lawyers). Whether used
intentionally or not, repetitive questioning poses a challenge. On the one hand, asking about the same
alleged event repeatedly may increase the possibility of creating false reports in children who have not
suffered abuse. However, not repeating questions may decrease the likelihood that children who have
been victims of abuse will provide complete information.
Schaaf ’s research shows that interviewers may be able to predict which children might be more
prone to suggestibility.
FPG investigator
Jennifer Schaaf
looks for factors
that help predict
the accuracy
of children’s
memories

#56 | November 2008
To Tell The Truth
What happens when a defendant’s guilt or innocence hinges solely on a child’s
testimony? Defendants argue that children’s memories are too unreliable to be the basis
for a verdict. Child
rights advocates counter that
since child sex abuse is rarely
witnessed and frequently leaves
no physical evidence that victim
testimony is vital. A study from
FPG researcher Jennifer Schaaf
provides new insights into
understanding when children’s
memories are more likely to
be accurate. Her findings were
published in the Journal of
Experimental Child Psychology.
There are two major concerns
about children’s ability to report
the truth in forensic situations.
First, are they able to resist
misleading information? And
second, how hesitant are they
to reveal negative experiences?
To better predict which children
tend to be vulnerable to these
factors, Schaaf examined their
relationship to specific traits
among children. She studied 42
three-year-old and 40 five-year-old
children.
Susceptibility to being Misled
Repetitive questioning is both a common technique used to elicit information and an unintentional
byproduct of interviews by multiple people (e.g., social workers, police, lawyers). Whether used
intentionally or not, repetitive questioning poses a challenge. On the one hand, asking about the same
alleged event repeatedly may increase the possibility of creating false reports in children who have not
suffered abuse. However, not repeating questions may decrease the likelihood that children who have
been victims of abuse will provide complete information.
Schaaf ’s research shows that interviewers may be able to predict which children might be more
prone to suggestibility.
FPG investigator
Jennifer Schaaf
looks for factors
that help predict
the accuracy
of children’s
memories